Iowa Considers Re-opening Caves

[PYoungbaer]

Iowa's Maquoketa State Park considers re-opening. No surprise, attendance was severely impacted last year with the cave closure, despite the park officially being open.

http://qctimes.com/news/local/article_b8e6889e-46ed-11e0-9084-001cc4c002e0.html

[BrianC]

I hate to tell him, but its not his call. The responsibility for thie falls on the caving community to inform the federal government of the atrocities derived from a handful of extremists claiming that the sky is falling. The bats will survive, to what extent is unknown, but we can do nothing to stop the WNS spread nor do cavers increase the spread. Hazel Barton will hopefully have some details soon!

[wyandottecaver]

With WNS careening across IN this year it would be an interesting leap of logic. I think we should in fact argue that they stay closed. If Iowa was afraid of hiker/cavers when WNS was 3 states away, why open them when WNS is imminent on their doorstep? To BLAME hikers and cavers when it ominiously does arrive just after they re-open.

Im sure their main motivation is cash. But while I doubt it's intentional, it's a set up. Just like when you saw the poor guy in the red shirt join an away team on star trek.....

[BrianC]

With WNS careening across IN this year it would be an interesting leap of logic. I think we should in fact argue that they stay closed. If Iowa was afraid of hiker/cavers when WNS was 3 states away, why open them when WNS is imminent on their doorstep? To BLAME hikers and cavers when it ominiously does arrive just after they re-open.

Im sure their main motivation is cash. But while I doubt it's intentional, it's a set up. Just like when you saw the poor guy in the red shirt join an away team on star trek.....

Your logic is not far fetched, rather possibly very real. Intentional forcing the human vector theory? I still (critically thinking) have no other action than to force my point that cavers would do good to rally against the over reaching theories that create hysteria in the environmental movements wanting protection for our bats. There seems to be "correctness" to be vigilante in environmental protection. I have to agree! There are proper ways to determine what will work, and what will not. There has not been any convincing evidence that stopping cavers from entering caves will stop WNS.

[John Lovaas]

Another reason might be that the Iowa Grotto of the NSS has been working with closely with IA DNR since day one on the WNS issue. The full closure of caves in Maquoketa was a management decision based on IA DNR's exceedingly limited resources. Gating the primary hibernaculum in the park would be one the most epic(and expensive) gating projects in US history, I reckon.

Iowa Grotto members are doing the 'boots on the ground' WNS work in Iowa; many of them are scientists that can see right through the speculation about human WNS vectors, and can discuss WNS issues in a way that fairly expresses the reality about modes of transmission.

I personally find this rather cheering; just yesterday, the Wisconsin Assembly Natural Resources Committee voted to approve permanent adoption of Rule 10-123;

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/ruletext/10-123-0.pdf

Which, as it is currently written, would permanently prohibit any caving gear used outside of Wisconsin from being in or near a mine or cave in the state, and permanently force any landowner, if WIDNR deems necessary, to prevent access to their cave by either humans or bats, at the landowner's expense, if necessary.

A crappy day in Wisconsin, a good day in Iowa.

[PYoungbaer]

John,

As I look at the Wisconsin Assembly calendar, it looks like the hearing you attended and refer to is a standing House (Assembly) Committee. What is the legal standing of this Committee versus the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules, which is the entity I would think would need to approve, disapprove, or amend the rule before it became permanent? I understand the administrative rule and legislative oversight process is complicated, but I'm trying to ascertain what opportunities may still exist for public input.

That said, reviewing your link to the permanent rule from the Natural Resources Board, they continue to put forth inaccurate and misleading information. One might be willing to give them the benefit of the doubt the first time around, but having submitted written testimony twice specifically correcting their erroneous information, I can only conclude that they are intentionally lying and misleading, statements I do not make lightly.

Example: they state, “The USGS National Wildlife Health Center has detected G. destructans fungal spores in cave sediment demonstrating persistence of the fungus in the absence of bats." This is patently false. The protocols for collection of sediment samples told collectors specifically to sample "soil or guano under or near where bats hibernate." As this was done during the winter, this was done in the presence, not absence, of bats. Further, "persistence" is moot, as the samples were current with the presence of bats. We informed them of this inaccuracy on the record, and in writing, yet they continue to make the false statement.

Example: they state, "Consequently, Wisconsin's cave bat population as a whole is threatened by this devastating disease. The little brown bat is Wisconsin’s most common bat species and because this species has seen the greatest mortality rate due to WNS, Wisconsin anticipates significant impacts to its cave bat populations when WNS begins to affect Wisconsin bats. Research published in the journal Science (August 2010) states “…we expect a 99% chance of regional extinction of little brown myotis within the next 16 years.” This is deliberately misleading on two counts. First, given the context of the paragraph above, the implication is that it is Wisconsin's bats that were the subject of the research. In fact, that study concerned bats in the Northeast (New York, New England). Second, the research made a range of predictions - 16 years " Actually, here's the quote from the lead researcher (Wired Science): “If mortality and spread continue the way it has in the past four years, that’s where we get the very distressing prediction of a high chance of regional extinction in 16 to 20 years,” said Winifred Frick, a Boston University bat researcher." Note: "if" mortality and spread continue as it has... are conditions plugged in to a mathematical model. They also plugged a variety of other assumptions, resulting in the timeline going out 100 years - but still, admittedly, devastating to bats.

There are numerous other examples of errors and misleading statements, which were pointed out in writing, but ignored. Take a look at the estimates of costs of sealing caves ($100 - $500). Anyone out there build a bat gate for this amount? But wait, these aren't bat gates, but complete sealings.

A permanent ban on anything that has been used in or near (within 100 feet) of a cave or mine anywhere outside the state of Wisconsin. Not just from WNS areas or even buffer zones. My glasses? I can't just decon them under these rules, but must get a new pair. Guess I won't be going to Wisconsin. A scientist's equipment? And we're not just talking bat studies here. Photographers? Will Dr. Tom Kunz, for example, have the funds to buy Wisconsin cave-specific thermal imaging equipment? My sense is that he and other scientists will refrain from studying in Wisconsin. This was clearly not thought through.

Did you read the enforcement sections? These are heavy-handed actions to enforce bad science. Excluding bats? Where are they going to go? What about the rest of the ecosystem that depends on them? Although we've asked numerous questions of WIDNR, they have not deigned to reply to date - months later.

Forcing private property owners to incur expense? I can foresee the property rights lawsuit the first time that happens.

What is going on in Wisconsin?

[BrianC]

It appears that Wisconsin has seen the regulations created by false assumptions regarding many environmental issues as of late, and have done nothing more than join their ridiculousness of policy. Why don't they read some of my far out assumptions and use them for their policy making? It would be closer to the truth.

[Teresa]

Any chance we can get the Wisconsin bat biologists to unionize? Then their governor would be honor-bound to stamp them out.

[Teresa]

Re Iowa: it's most likely a matter of cash.
In Missouri, show caves, even state run show caves, charging fees remain open. Wild caves with no fees are closed.
No doubt the community closest to Maquoketa Caves is suffering.

Maybe Bob Liebman was right. Maybe cavers need another $2 bill campaign (or gold dollar campaign) to show how much money cavers bring to a local economy, vs what they are losing by keeping caves closed.
I think much of the poor way in which we are being treated is because folks don't know how much of an impact we have on local economies, esp. in rural areas.

Teresa

[Dawn Ryan]

Re Iowa: it's most likely a matter of cash. Teresa

Teresa (Jo Schaper),

All that the IDNR asked cavers here to do is to stay out of hibernaculums in the winter and decon their gear, which we've been doing. The Iowa grotto even held their annual picnic at another county park with caves this past summer. Maquoketa gets so many visitors other than "cavers", and no way for the park to monitor those folks. Regardless of what are the motives, it's still good news.

John Lovaas and I spoke at the Wisconsin State Assembly Natural Resources Board Wednesday, which John mentioned they voted for in part yesterday. I spoke against the sealing of caves and the role that bats, rodents etc., play in cave ecosystems. But even after all that I was told by one state rep that "we have to do something." A big difference of management Iowa vs Wisconsin.

Dawn Ryan

[tncaver]

John Lovaas and I spoke at the Wisconsin State Assembly Natural Resources Board Wednesday, which John mentioned they voted for in part yesterday. I spoke against the sealing of caves and the role that bats, rodents etc., play in cave ecosystems. But even after all that I was told by one state rep that "we have to do something." A big difference of management Iowa vs Wisconsin.

Dawn Ryan

Perhaps if Wisconsin seals their caves with bats inside, the Center for Biological Diversity will sue the state. That would be a wake up call for them,
however, too late for the bats.

[John Lovaas]

What is the legal standing of this Committee versus the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules, which is the entity I would think would need to approve, disapprove, or amend the rule before it became permanent? I understand the administrative rule and legislative oversight process is complicated, but I'm trying to ascertain what opportunities may still exist for public input.

As I understand it, the rules would be reviewed by the Assembly and Senate natural resources/environment committees. Both, apparently, can call for hearing on the rules, ask DNR to make changes or start over from scratch, or vote to approve, or do nothing- taking no action causes the rule to be 'approved by default' after 30 days.

Here's the only online links I can find to the status of the rules:

10-114; Proposes to provide immediate protection of cave bats that meet listing criteria as a threatened species, to address the emerging spread and threat of White Nose Syndrome to bat populations. - https://health.wisconsin.gov/admrules/p ... RmoId=9763

10-115; Proposes to list Geomyces destructans as a Prohibited Invasive Species. - https://health.wisconsin.gov/admrules/p ... RmoId=9743

10-123; Proposes to develop rules which give the DNR the ability to effectively manage the fungus spread and to implement management actions to protect Wisconsin's cave bats - https://health.wisconsin.gov/admrules/p ... moId=10083

A permanent ban on anything that has been used in or near (within 100 feet) of a cave or mine anywhere outside the state of Wisconsin. Not just from WNS areas or even buffer zones. My glasses? I can't just decon them under these rules, but must get a new pair. Guess I won't be going to Wisconsin. A scientist's equipment? And we're not just talking bat studies here. Photographers? Will Dr. Tom Kunz, for example, have the funds to buy Wisconsin cave-specific thermal imaging equipment?

Yes, yes, yes, and I believe bat scientists(and others) from outside of the state will have challenges conducting research inside the the state in the future. There was a single sentence in one the draft rules the Natural Resources Board reviewed in December 2010; it stated that research on any cave life would be done under a permit process. Just one sentence- no discussion on how this would work. I haven't seen the sentence in the 2011 clearinghouse rules- yet.

Did you read the enforcement sections? These are heavy-handed actions to enforce bad science. Excluding bats? Where are they going to go? What about the rest of the ecosystem that depends on them? Although we've asked numerous questions of WIDNR, they have not deigned to reply to date - months later.

Forcing private property owners to incur expense? I can foresee the property rights lawsuit the first time that happens.

It blew my mind that the Assembly Committee voted so quickly to approve 10-123, just because of the property rights issues. And I thought that this newly elected Republican legislature was going to go to the DNR and their 'heavy handed' regulation with a buzzsaw- that was the first thing Governor Walker said when he won the election. Huh.

What is going on in Wisconsin?

Ya got me...

[Teresa]

All that the IDNR asked cavers here to do is to stay out of hibernaculums in the winter and decon their gear, which we've been doing. The Iowa grotto even held their annual picnic at another county park with caves this past summer. Maquoketa gets so many visitors other than "cavers", and no way for the park to monitor those folks. Regardless of what are the motives, it's still good news.
Dawn Ryan

The original post said that attendance in Maquoketa Caves was way down. Expeditures at parks have to be justified by attendance figures. Therefore, attendance = cash. Yes, I know IA doesn't have an entrance fee, but it does have a host of other attendee fees (camping/shelter rentals, etc). Missouri is the same way. I've lived with justification by park attendance figures since 1993.

Hey, I'm all for reopening all caves for late spring/summer/early fall, except for maternity/hibernacula, under easily obtained permits for all, not just NSS members. The permit would be the gateway for user education about WNS. We're not at odds here. However, economic impact does play a role in public land cave access, and cavers should be aware of it.

[tncaver]

As always, it's about money. But still better than keeping all caves closed. Closing caves won't stop infected bats from flying in anyway.

[commanderzoom]

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/ruletext/10-123-0.pdf

and permanently force any landowner, if WIDNR deems necessary, to prevent access to their cave by either humans or bats, at the landowner's expense, if necessary.

WTF????? I'm so glad I don't live in Wisconsin. Is that really legal? I'd be the arsehole "gating" my cave entrance with massive amounts of duct tape and having people armed with tasers stationed just out of sight just so I could say I did it. That or I'd be the arsehole trying to start my own country on my land and declaring myself queen.

I'm actually serious.